The idea that viruses are self-contained entities separate from the organisms they infect is an artifact of the human mind's power-saving system of modelling the world in terms of functional-decomposition. Viruses are non-living extraorganism messages crucial as a source of novelty in evolution.
Nevertheless, it would be nice to find cures for them.
We need other organisms to synthesize certain vital nutrients (not to mention free oxygen) for us. Does this mean that it is pointless to consider ourselves self-contained entities?
The 'inividualistic' feature of viruses is their genome, which is what gets replicated when they take over a cell, and which is subject to evolution itself, not just an agent in the evolution of 'true' organisms.
Organism's genes (and phenotype) that is transmitted sexually are easy to separate from viruses and bacteria. Of course there is some mixing, like retroviruses, but the distinction is not artificial.
It’s an interesting point. Having no medical / bio knowledge, is argue that from a logical perspective it could easily go both ways. 1) we model them to talk because we do 2) we model them not to talk because we don’t recognize their form of talk.
The statement "There are fundamental differences between viruses and vesicles: Viruses can replicate and vesicles cannot" seems either paraphrased or dumbed down. Viruses can be replicated by cells, but they certainly cannot themselves replicate. And it's literally that kind of nitpicking that keeps science on track.
The distinction, I think, is the matter of where the genome resides. Viruses have their own genome; they need to hijack the mechanisms of cells to reproduce, but it is their genome that is being replicated and disseminated. For a vesicle, however, it seems that the genetic instructions for creating them are part of the cell's genome, and those instructions do not get copied into the vesicle (at least, not in a form that can get itself replicated) even in the case of vesicles containing some RNA.
I would think that even if there was a form of bacterial sex that involved using vesicles as the medium for exchanging genetic material, that would not necessarily be virus-like unless the genetic material being transferred was capable of promoting the creation of vesicles containing copies of itself by the receiving bacterium. I don't know if that case would be distinguishable from a virus.
We can in fact image them in multiple ways! Check out these super high resolution images of vesicles on a cell wall - the honeycomb bits are the vesicles' clathrin cages: https://taraskalab.nhlbi.nih.gov/media/
The article hints at some of the same mechanisms for extracellular vesicles. If that’s the case then maybe they are more closely related than outwardly expressed in the copy.
There are viruses that enter a host, merge with its DNA, replicate along with it for generations just like "normal" DNA. Eventually, it can "wake up", cut itself out of the host genes, and start replicating as a virus again.
Some of our DNA is apparently made out of viruses that did this and got stuck.
The model that emerges from consideration of recent discoveries is something like, bacteria and viruses form a single global organism that is the primary resident of this planet (by mass, by throughput, etc.)
> Might there be pathogens that MITM vesicles en route? Rip them open and plant another message inside, and send them along?
Seems like they do something effectively the same. Here's an excerpt from the article:
... retroviruses also drape a second layer over their protein shell by wrapping themselves in pieces of their host’s cell membrane. The host-derived membrane protects the virus from discovery by the immune system
> More recently, however, scientists discovered that cells could package their molecular information in what are known as extracellular vesicles.
Seems like cells then need some type message-response mechanism. It could be that there's an incidental minmax game happening at a cellular level, leading to types of intelligence that we don't understand at all but maybe can be modeled.
I think this creates incredible disruption opportunities for drugs and healthcare if AI can augment the intelligence of a cell in the long term.
The article describes vesicles as a sort of language, I always thought of them as a cellular routing mechanism.
Whatever they are, I think they're super interesting. I named one of my routing libraries after a related organelle: https://github.com/jdonaldson/golgi
Imagine how cool a story it would be if viruses were just a weapon developed by intelligent microscopic life. Relics of an ancient war who's history is written in the telomeres of our DNA in an encoding which we cannot decipher.
teaspoons|7 years ago
Nevertheless, it would be nice to find cures for them.
stephengillie|7 years ago
Previously on HN:
800 million viruses fall onto every square meter of Earth every day. They kill 20% of bacterial life every day. [0]
Video simulation of HIV infecting a cell and reproducing. [1]
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16839636
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16982396
mannykannot|7 years ago
The 'inividualistic' feature of viruses is their genome, which is what gets replicated when they take over a cell, and which is subject to evolution itself, not just an agent in the evolution of 'true' organisms.
nabla9|7 years ago
Organism's genes (and phenotype) that is transmitted sexually are easy to separate from viruses and bacteria. Of course there is some mixing, like retroviruses, but the distinction is not artificial.
verelo|7 years ago
TheRealPomax|7 years ago
mannykannot|7 years ago
I would think that even if there was a form of bacterial sex that involved using vesicles as the medium for exchanging genetic material, that would not necessarily be virus-like unless the genetic material being transferred was capable of promoting the creation of vesicles containing copies of itself by the receiving bacterium. I don't know if that case would be distinguishable from a virus.
random314|7 years ago
I don't want to be nitpicking, but can you provide citations? How has nitpicking on popular science articles kept science on track?
yread|7 years ago
heyitsguay|7 years ago
jcims|7 years ago
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/watch-the-...
The article hints at some of the same mechanisms for extracellular vesicles. If that’s the case then maybe they are more closely related than outwardly expressed in the copy.
carapace|7 years ago
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/P/bo222...
There are viruses that enter a host, merge with its DNA, replicate along with it for generations just like "normal" DNA. Eventually, it can "wake up", cut itself out of the host genes, and start replicating as a virus again.
Some of our DNA is apparently made out of viruses that did this and got stuck.
The model that emerges from consideration of recent discoveries is something like, bacteria and viruses form a single global organism that is the primary resident of this planet (by mass, by throughput, etc.)
neilk|7 years ago
Since these vesicles resemble viruses, is it possible for them to be a form of organism-to-organism communication? Accidental, or intentional?
Might there be pathogens that MITM vesicles en route? Rip them open and plant another message inside, and send them along?
RoyTyrell|7 years ago
Seems like they do something effectively the same. Here's an excerpt from the article:
... retroviruses also drape a second layer over their protein shell by wrapping themselves in pieces of their host’s cell membrane. The host-derived membrane protects the virus from discovery by the immune system
ethn|7 years ago
One of the most important scarcely explored phenomena.
whataretensors|7 years ago
Seems like cells then need some type message-response mechanism. It could be that there's an incidental minmax game happening at a cellular level, leading to types of intelligence that we don't understand at all but maybe can be modeled.
I think this creates incredible disruption opportunities for drugs and healthcare if AI can augment the intelligence of a cell in the long term.
jdonaldson|7 years ago
Whatever they are, I think they're super interesting. I named one of my routing libraries after a related organelle: https://github.com/jdonaldson/golgi
RoyTyrell|7 years ago
foxyv|7 years ago
swsieber|7 years ago
rs86|7 years ago